Subject: Re: Condi's take on Iran
Which is one of many reasons (outlined earlier) why the JCPOA was a failure.

Then Trump will never get a nuclear deal. It is inconceivable that Tehran would agree to the sort of restrictions that were in the JCPOA (much less anything more stringent) in exchange for nothing. That the sanctions and asset freezes remain in place forever? Or that any unfrozen assets go to non-Iranian parties?

Strategic patience is hard, and it isn’t always satisfying. But time is on the side of the U.S. and its allies. Reaching no deal is fine.

Reaching no deal is where we were in February. Reaching no deal means that we're back where we were after the JCPOA went away and Iran was engaged in unrestricted uranium enrichment. Reaching no deal means Iran retains all it's ability to get a nuclear weapon (which Trump has said is intolerable) as existed in February, and which was so dangerous that it was necessary to launch this war. How is that now "fine"? If it's fine, why did we do this? Because we needed to eliminate Iran's navy?